Part II Class/Sequence diagrams general question

[Sergej Logis]

Hello friends!
I have quite simple question regarding Class and Sequence diagrams. Do we need to specify methods arguments/return types in aforementioned diagrams? I have tried doing so, and diagrams started to looking overcrowded with information. Classes boxes became huge. I wonder, do fine-grained methods arguments/returns types are mandatory, or they can be omitted if method name clearly states what it's intended to? E.g. searchProduct() method, it doesn't really matters which arguments this method takes and what it returns, IMHO...
Also, should we show generic arguments in Class attributes? E.g., I have a class with argument of type Map<Integer, Renderer>. How to correctly specify it in Class diagram?
Thanks a lot!

[Sergej Logis]

Anyone?

[Will Myers]

I showed them for the important methods and if they are in your sequence diagram then they must be in your class diagram. I didn't show getters and setters or any methods that were outside the scope oif the use cases.

** I have not had my score back yet so this may be wrong but it's basically what it says in Cade's book **

[Sergej Logis]

Thanks for reply.
However, my question is not about showing methods, but about showing arguments and return types of methods shown.
Adding them makes Sequence Diagram covered with text and Class Diagram to contain huge class boxes...

[Will Myers]

I showed both.

I trimmed down some of the names I called them for this very reason

[Sergej Logis]

I see... I would like them to be optional, that would make diagrams much more clear...
Any other opinions?